Chemical Engineer/Chemical Laboratory Stu here? whats the Job like in 9ja, i study in RSA!!!

please house,am a graduate of chemical engineering with a 2.2. Intend doing my masters abroad,workin on it rite nw bt nd advises as i want to specialize on d oil n gas sector.What course and skl do u advise i apply 4(U.K,U.S)

isarai:

please house,am a graduate of chemical engineering with a 2.2. Intend doing my masters abroad,workin on it rite nw bt nd advises as i want to specialize on d oil n gas sector.What course and skl do u advise i apply 4(U.K,U.S)

isarai it all depends on which area of the O&G sector you are looking to get into, i.e. safety, process design, project management
This will pretty much determine which masters programme to do. Sheffield university's(Msc safety) is highly recommended, RGU in aberdeen specialises in o&g courses. If your preference is for a masters in process engineering then consider the likes of Imperial college, UCL

Moerorlah:

Hello everyone. I am new here and I hope someone can offer me some advice. I hold a first class degree in chemical engineering from Nigeria but just enrolled in a PhD programme in a chemical engineering in a University in the US (in top 60). In this programme, I might be doing research in process safety, risk analyses and reliability with some respected profs in process systems and control.

However, this is my worry: inasmuch as I don't want to be in the academia (I have always wanted to be in the industry: infact I accepted this PhD offer only because i could not get a job in Nigeria), does it make any sense to go as far as getting a PhD to get a good job later in the process industries?I understand many employers value more relevant experience than educational achievement, is that true?

I am thinking of switching to a masters in petroleumn (US, Europe or Saudi). Why? Like someone rightly obsevered, process engineers don't have as many job opportunities in nigeria as petroleum engineers.

Please could someone give me his/her opinion about this proposed move of mine? I can definitely get my PhD, but I am more concerned about what lies ahead. PhD is very challenging and I don't want to invest that much energy and significant years of my life in a course that will only pay back at a rate commeasurate (or even less)
with Msc.

Thanks, and hoping to hear from u guys soon.

Ok, just to help you clarify stuff here: getting a PhD does not constrain your opportunities to the academia. Infact most PhDs now prefer to work in the industry and there are plenty opportunities for them there. Just like you, I made a first class in chemical engineering from a university in Nigeria. Then I went for an MS in petroleum engineering and actually got a full time offer with Chevron US upstream after my MS. But I turned down the offer and decided to do a PhD instead. Besides the fact that a PhD gives you better interview opportunities (most companies are refusing to interview international students on any program less than the PhD), the pay and eventual pay off is way better (atleast in my case and in the cases of most of my friends who also towed the same path). And by the way, non of us is going to the academia - we are all headed for the industry and even in these difficult recruitment times, for most of us, the struggle now is how to choose between highly competing offers from different companies.
So bottomline is - with a PhD, you get to choose where you want to be - industry or academia, atleast with a PhD in engineering.

Hope this helps.

Thanks so much for your reply Nicklee.
I am bothered about the future of Chemical/Process Engineering. To me, it's kind of saturated now and that's why chemical engineers today are going into solar cells, semiconductors, bio- areas and many other ludicrous stuffs (not primarily meant for them ). Besides, according to what I have learnt (Bureau of labor statistics), Chemical engineering is the only engineering profession that will have a negative growth rate in the next few years, while an engineering field like petroleum engineering has a predicted growth rate of about 16%.
Also the demand for petroleum engineers is on the increase, and from common analyses, will continue to rise due to the rising global demand for hydrocarbons. Crude oil is continuosly getting more and more difficult to find and produce, one thing that immediately comes to mind is that more highly skilled petroleum engineers will be needed to do this. I suppose this explains why petroleum engineers will be in very high demand in the nearest future.
Getting a PhD in such an area like petroleum engineering will, no doubt, will make big oil companies 'beg at your feet' because they really need to get as much oil as possible out of the groud to meet their rising demand; an objective which requires a highly skilled personnel. Whereas, a PhD in chemical/process engineering will make you 'beg at their (companys') feet' because they don't really need you; all they need is to keep their facilities running and they have a bunch of BS and MS guys who can do that. (Perhaps that's why u chose to study petroleum engineering and not Chemical).
I don't know if I am being overly critical, but this has been my mentality.
Thanks again Nicklee, it does help a bit.

Moerorlah:

Thanks so much for your reply Nicklee.
I am bothered about the future of Chemical/Process Engineering. To me, it's kind of saturated now and that's why chemical engineers today are going into solar cells, semiconductors, bio- areas and many other ludicrous stuffs (not primarily meant for them ). Besides, according to what I have learnt (Bureau of labor statistics), Chemical engineering is the only engineering profession that will have a negative growth rate in the next few years, while an engineering field like petroleum engineering has a predicted growth rate of about 16%.
Also the demand for petroleum engineers is on the increase, and from common analyses, will continue to rise due to the rising global demand for hydrocarbons. Crude oil is continuosly getting more and more difficult to find and produce, one thing that immediately comes to mind is that more highly skilled petroleum engineers will be needed to do this. I suppose this explains why petroleum engineers will be in very high demand in the nearest future.
Getting a PhD in such an area like petroleum engineering will, no doubt, will make big oil companies 'beg at your feet' because they really need to get as much oil as possible out of the groud to meet their rising demand; an objective which requires a highly skilled personnel. Whereas, a PhD in chemical/process engineering will make you 'beg at their (companys') feet' because they don't really need you; all they need is to keep their facilities running and they have a bunch of BS and MS guys who can do that. (Perhaps that's why u chose to study petroleum engineering and not Chemical).
I don't know if I am being overly critical, but this has been my mentality.
Thanks again Nicklee, it does help a bit.

Hmm, it is interesting that I was talking to a friend as recent as last week and was lamenting that my biggest regret so far is not pursuing a PhD in chemical engineering. When I finished undergrad in Nigeria, I decided to apply to only 2 schools - One in California for petroleum engineering (now called energy resources engineering) and the other in Massachusetts for chemical engineering. Then I was fine with either/or but I tilted towards going to Massachusetts. I ended up applying to the school in California only because the person that was supposed to pay my application fee missed the deadline for the Massachusetts school. OK, bottomline is - I didn't have much of a choice anymore, so I went for PE.
I love chemical engineering and I think PE is so easy that you don't really need a long degree in PE to do well in the industry or even in academia. On the other hand, CHG is pretty broad and you can really do lots of cool stuff - from Bio. to organic semi-conductors, to Enhanced Oil recovery to reservoir engineering. And at the PhD level, I have come to understand that it doesn't really matter whether you are PE or CHG in research in the oil industry. For stats., ExxonMobil is made up of 18% CHGs and only 4% PEs. Infact when I interned with them, I noticed that there were more CHGs in their research company than PEs (ratio of more than 3:1).
CHGs jobs had been growing in the past many years and it is not surprising that the growth rate can turn negative. But there are still lots of opportunities for the graduates, even in the oil industry if you decide to work in that industry.
I'm not sure which school you got into but I think that also plays a role.

Hey Nicklee,
Can I mail you privately. If you don't mind, please send an empty email to morola [at] ymail [dot] com.
Thanks.

I GREET D HOUSE OF CHEMICAL/CHEMICAL PROCESS/ PETROLEUM AND GAS ENGINEERS, U ALL ARE "CORROSIVE", I AM A FRESH GRADUATE OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING AND I WANT 2 LEARN A COMPUTER PROGRAMME DAT IS CHEMICAL ENGINEERING BASED. I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE SUGGESTIONS FROM DIS GREAT HOUSE.

I'd suggest Aspen HYSYS as your first point of call. If you can get your hands on a copy of the software or attend a training course, it would be very useful.

http://www.aspentech.com/core/aspen-hysys.aspx


The following training manual will be useful as well and is free to download:

http://eprints.utm.my/3030/2/HYSYS_for_UTM_Degree%2B%2B_Program.pdf

It is designed for people using HYSYS for the first time.

I hail all Chemical Engineer aka "Battery chargers" in the house.

debosky:

I'd suggest Aspen HYSYS as your first point of call. If you can get your hands on a copy of the software or attend a training course, it would be very useful.

http://www.aspentech.com/core/aspen-hysys.aspx


The following training manual will be useful as well and is free to download:

http://eprints.utm.my/3030/2/HYSYS_for_UTM_Degree%2B%2B_Program.pdf

It is designed for people using HYSYS for the first time.

I agree with you about ASPEN, infact its the lazy man's companion , . . . . . practically does "everything" for you. But Debo , which other good programme do you suggest?

^^Olga, Pipephase, Pipesim, Flarenet, and dnt forget MS excel- very powerful tool.

snthesis:

^^Olga, Pipephase, Pipesim, Flarenet, and dnt forget MS excel- very powerful tool.

my concern is (1) the courses are expensive especially if its self-funded, (2) Poster might spend all that money to acquire the skill and if he isn't in a role where he can use/develop the skills then he would most definitely forget most of it.

poster, which simulation tool did you use for your degree design project?

snthesis:

^^Olga, Pipephase, Pipesim, Flarenet, and dnt forget MS excel- very powerful tool.

Thanks Snthesis

Those suggestions are good snthesis, but as Kenny said, they are quite expensive to learn by oneself, and even if you do learn how to use them, application of the knowledge is of paramount importance else the knowledge is lost.

In addition to the above, COMSOL Multiphysics software is excellent for computational fluid dynamics, chemical reaction engineering and heat transfer.

Flarenet is next on my personal list, but only if I think I'll get opportunities to use it in the hear future.

wow,

this forum is really one of the best ideas anyone can think of.
well, I just think that the prospects of a chemical engineer is still bright in the midst of all challenges

debosky:

Those suggestions are good snthesis, but as Kenny said, they are quite expensive to learn by oneself, and even if you do learn how to use them, application of the knowledge is of paramount importance else the knowledge is lost.

In addition to the above, COMSOL Multiphysics software is excellent for computational fluid dynamics, chemical reaction engineering and heat transfer.

Flarenet is next on my personal list, but only if I think I'll get opportunities to use it in the hear future.

i hed success, is wen "opportunity meets preparedness", no doubt the software's costs a fortune to learn- its usually advisable for people trying to get ahead at work, not for trainee engineers, that being said, we need to keep abreast of the innovations around us, else we get left behind.
p.s
once you have received the formal training from certified instructors (plus the "kpally"/certificate) nothing stops you from getting a crack version for your personnel use.

snthesis:

i hed success, is wen "opportunity meets preparedness", no doubt the software's costs a fortune to learn- its usually advisable for people trying to get ahead at work, not for trainee engineers, that being said, we need to keep abreast of the innovations around us, else we get left behind.
p.s
once you have received the formal training from certified instructors (plus the "kpally"/certificate) nothing stops you from getting a crack version for your personnel use.

I'm curious to know how training and practice time on a particular software program will enhance your job opportunities as a chemical engineer. Not being sarcastic, mind you, just wondering.

I'll give u a detailed response tomorrow but for now - I hav a quick question, will a Masters degree enhance the job opportunities of a chemical engineer? Not being sarcastic either.

snthesis:

I'll give u a detailed response tomorrow but for now - I hav a quick question, will a Masters degree enhance the job opportunities of  a chemical engineer? Not being sarcastic either.

Trying to find a way to explain what I am asking.
A Masters degree sounds more like it for an engineer, than software application proficiency. After all, it's not like the IT industry, where proficiency in a particular software application is usually the job itself. I studied electronic engineering, and I would imagine that my engineering skills and knowledge would be more valuable in industry than, say, my ability to use  SPICE. If I have strong knowledge of how to design electronic circuits, I can easily be trained by the company to do that using SPICE.

You also said one could get a crack version of those software for personal use. Are they actually available in crack versions? I would think in process environments, you guys would use highly specialized software, not something that someone could rip and upload to a fileshare on the Internet. Even if you could, I'm not sure how easy it would be to run a desktop version of SAP PLM, which normally runs in a process or manufacturing environment, or even what meaningful skills could be derived from there. I mean, the software won't help you to learn the science better.

Chemical engineering should not be any different. I'm just wondering, would chemical engineers anywhere be able to get a job solely on the basis of having done a training in a particular software application, even if they have no industry experience? Just curious.

AjanleKoko:

Chemical engineering should not be any different. I'm just wondering, would chemical engineers anywhere be able to get a job solely on the basis of having done a training in a particular software application, even if they have no industry experience? Just curious.

You do have a point AJ - the truth is, without a sound understanding of energy and material balances, and more importantly, thermodynamics and fluid dynamics, you can't really use knowledge from process simulation and other such software.

As always, it is the detailed understanding of the fundamental principles that will enable you to utilise the software in a manner that will produce meaningful results.

However, what snthesis was implying (I think) is that in a market saturated with 'theorists' as it were - people who know the fundamentals but lack the ability to use the modern tools, having this additional feather in your cap will give you an incremental advantage when competing for jobs.

debosky:

You do have a point AJ - the truth is, without a sound understanding of energy and material balances, and more importantly, thermodynamics and fluid dynamics, you can't really use knowledge from process simulation and other such software.

As always, it is the detailed understanding of the fundamental principles that will enable you to utilise the software in a manner that will produce meaningful results.

However, what snthesis was implying (I think) is that in a market saturated with 'theorists' as it were - people who know the fundamentals but lack the ability to use the modern tools, having this additional feather in your cap will give you an incremental advantage when competing for jobs.

Okay, I understand now. Just sounded weird, as chemical engineering would require an industrial environment to function, unlike in IT where just about any Joe can acquire the skills simply by learning the technology.

@debosky
thanks, but once you have graduated from a certified university as a chemical engineer, it is assumed that you have a "sound understanding of energy and material balances, and more importantly, thermodynamics and fluid dynamics" e.t.c.
@ajalenkoko
chemical engineering is quite broad.,i'll talk from a process/flow assurance engineer point of view.

AjanleKoko:

I'm curious to know how training and practice time on a particular software program will enhance your job opportunities as a chemical engineer. Not being sarcastic, mind you, just wondering.

lets start from the basics:
my quote"hed success, is wen "opportunity meets preparedness", no doubt the software's costs a fortune to learn- its usually advisable for people trying to get ahead at work, not for trainee engineers, that being said, we need to keep abreast of the innovations around us, else we get left behind."

key terms:
Ahead: it means "To be more advanced or in an advantageous position"
experienced (opposite of Trainee): "having knowledge or skill from observation or participation"

being ahead is having that extra factor your peers do not have. Lest i forget in this day and age you cant claim to be an experienced process engineer without having the expertise on some of these simulation software.- (take a look at the requirements for experience hires at the moment).


practical example: 3candidates come for an interview same grade, top schools, but only one candidate has experience with the use of simulation tools, most likely than not that candidate will get picked.


P.S

Running simulations/Flow Assurance has a number of benefits, one of which is the ability to run real time envisaged scenarios and cases, interpret the results and then optimally design/redesign appropriately to meet safety and client requirements. Small wonder major multi-national Oil and Gas companies invest a lot of resources in developing/applying new(proven) simulation software that accurately predict flow characteristics.
Flow Assurance is a vital aspect of design/process engineering, as it reduces the costly oops! factor to an absolute minimum provided appropriate data and corresponding correlations are applied.

Pls could debosky n synthesis send me their email or Yahoo! IM IDs. You guys are wonder kids.

I'm on deluxegas@hotmail.com

debosky:

You do have a point AJ - the truth is, without a sound understanding of energy and material balances, and more importantly, thermodynamics and fluid dynamics, you can't really use knowledge from process simulation and other such software.

As always, it is the detailed understanding of the fundamental principles that will enable you to utilise the software in a manner that will produce meaningful results.

However, what snthesis was implying (I think) is that in a market saturated with 'theorists' as it were - people who know the fundamentals but lack the ability to use the modern tools, having this additional feather in your cap will give you an incremental advantage when competing for jobs.

what of a situation whereby you write programs software yourself to solve most of your computations?

^^ Depends on the type of work you're doing. If you're doing a small calculation e.g. relief valve sizing and decide to write a short code in excel or matlab, then it might be sufficient.

However, no one will give sanction to construct a process plant without simulations performed with recognised and trusted tools - and even within those tools you will need to 'build' your own simulations.

You need to tailor your skills to the environment you are working in - no advice offered on this thread is 'absolute' as such. Depending on where you find yourself, you will require varying levels of software proficiency to succeed.

snthesis:

@ajalenkoko
chemical engineering is quite broad.,i'll talk from a process/flow assurance engineer point of view.

lets start from the basics:
my quote"hed success, is wen "opportunity meets preparedness", no doubt the software's costs a fortune to learn- its usually advisable for people trying to get ahead at work, not for trainee engineers, that being said, we need to keep abreast of the innovations around us, else we get left behind."

key terms:
Ahead: it means "To be more advanced or in an advantageous position"
experienced (opposite of Trainee): "having knowledge or skill from observation or participation"

being ahead is having that extra factor your peers do not have. Lest i forget in this day and age you cant claim to be an experienced process engineer without having the expertise on some of these simulation software.- (take a  look at the requirements for experience hires at the moment).


practical example: 3candidates come for an interview same grade, top schools, but only one candidate has experience with the use of simulation tools, most likely than not that candidate will get picked.

Not sure that I understand or agree with you. We're not talking about learning how to use MS excel here. Some of those tools are highly specialized, possibly even proprietary, no?
Maybe I'll ask the question a different way: Which is more important to a firm hiring engineers, the proficiency of a candidate in the fundamentals, or the proficiency in the use of a particular software package?

Also, trying to get ahead at work, and trying to get an advantage when you're looking for work are two different things, and can't definitely be approached the same way. Or maybe I'm the one out of sync

Depending on the position applied for, d order of precendence usually is

Appropriate degree>experience>software skills.
i.e. I wudnt hire a 1st class physics graduate with excellent use of chemical engrg software as a process engineer simply because the fundamental knowledge isn't there- "garbage in garbage out".

P.s
Dnt underestimate the power of MS excel- although matcad is now In vogue.

Getting a job and getting ahead at work ar on d same pedestal, d diff is one u ar trying to get into a coy while d other u r already employed. Which is why we as graduate engineers should not rest on our oars, but strive to keep abreast with the happenings in d international scene. Join a professional body-b active, attend seminars/trainings-improve urself yearly.

snthesis:


Dnt underestimate the power of MS excel- although matcad is now In vogue.

ms excel, matcad are both mathematical tools if when understood fully can be used to do a lot of proficiency work. i sometimes try to do complex mathematical designs in cad software such as autocad by defining complex mathematical functions within these soft wares then integrate the output into the cad software. for example, i may want to draw a complex surface defined by say 4x^5+6x^2+9. ordinarily, if i have to do this using programmable lang such as autolisps within auto cad, the lines of codes are complex and if you are not good in mathematics and programming, you will get garbage. but excel and mathcad can do these traumatically. so just customize the output of these into the input of the cad and you get the desired result easily.

snthesis:

Depending on the position applied for, d order of precendence usually is

Appropriate degree>experience>software skills.
i.e. I wudnt hire a 1st class physics graduate with excellent use of chemical engrg software as a process engineer simply because the fundamental knowledge isn't there- "garbage in garbage out".

P.s
Dnt underestimate the power of MS excel- although matcad is now In vogue.

snthesis:

Getting a job and getting ahead at work ar on d same pedestal, d diff is one u ar trying to get into a coy while d other u r already employed. Which is why we as graduate engineers should not rest on our oars, but strive to keep abreast with the happenings in d international scene. Join a professional body-b active, attend seminars/trainings-improve urself yearly.

Okay, I think you gave me the answer I was looking for there. Thanks.
Mind you, my reference to excel was relating to the proprietary nature of the kind of software used in your environments. Anybody can get hold of MS Excel, and can easily upskill themselves. But for some very specialized software that is used only within certain environments, sometimes even developed bespoke by some companies for their own projects, it may be difficult to get access to.

@lekside 44
tanx for the info.

deluxecad:

Pls could debosky n synthesis send me their email or Yahoo! IM IDs. You guys are wonder kids.

I'm on deluxegas@hotmail.com

no probs feel free to add